A Mead Project source page

Originally published as:

Editors' notes

Bogardus's Fundamentals of Social Psychology appeared
at the same time as Allport's Social Psychology. Both were influential
books within their own disciplines.

Fundamentals was Bogardus's second
Social Psychology textbook, expanding and supplanting his Essentials of Social Psychology first published in 1918. Fundamentals
went through four editions, the last published in 1950.

As one of the curiosities of history writing, when assembling
their Classics in Psychology series, published by Arno in the mid-1970s, Howard
Gardner and Judith Kreiger Garner included Bogardus's book as the Social
Psychology's representative textbook from the period.

Bogardus dedicated his book to E. A. Ross, the author of the 1908
textbook in Social Psychology.

Site Navigation

Fundamentals of Social Psychology

Chapter 15: Convention Diffusion

Emory S. Bogardus

CUSTOM and convention are terms that are often used interchangeably.
Sometimes custom is made to include convention.[1]
In the following discussion four main distinctions are made. (1) Convention is
employed primarily to refer to the form and custom to the content
of an idea or action that is socially inherited and imitated. (2) On the whole
convention is much less able to stand the test of rational criticism than is
custom, although the formal side of life unless overstressed gives dependability
to functional activities. (3) There is more superficial talk about convention
than custom, especially among the people who lay great stress upon manners.[2]
(4) Convention ordinarily outlives custom, for by its very nature, the skeleton
remains after the spirit has departed.

Convention and custom, however, are more alike than different ; both are
non-competitive, both are imitations of the past, both are inculcated chiefly in
the immature years of life. Convention, like custom, operates as both suggestion
and imitation ; it is the imitation phase which is more personal and hence
pertinent ; the two phases together constitute convention diffusion. Since
convention relates to the formal phases of life and custom to the content and
functional elements, it is clear that convention and custom generally relate to
different phases of the same thing. Much that was said in the preceding chapter
about custom applies in a way to convention; much that will be presented in this
chapter concerning convention is vitally related to custom. There are many
instances, however, where the structural side of an activity has become
separated from a living content, and hence stands alone—a mere shell. In other
cases, the function has been transferred or has become desiccated, leaving
chiefly a convention which still performs mechanically and lives on because some
people secure authority from its established prestige.

(
178)

Convention differs from fashion in many ways, for example, in being
non-competitive in character. All strive to imitate it exactly rather than to
push it to extremes in the competitive strife to outdo one another. It is not
open to discussion, question, criticism ; it is undeliberately maintained. The
assumption is that everyone will adopt it. It is not promoted by the few for a
short time as is fashion.

Convention arrives through social heredity. A person who accepts a
convention, does so by adding it to his stock of accepted procedures, as
distinguished from him who accepts a fashion, for the latter person is giving up
a new procedure for a newer one.[3]
The
process in the first case involves psychic addition ; in the second case,
psychic substitution.

Convention is often basic to fashion changes ; it is the crust over which
fashion cyclones move. The rigid convention of women wearing hats indoors at
public gatherings, even in church, is a psychic background on which plays the
rapid changes of the styles in women's hats. Likewise, formal occasions persist
conventionally without being seriously questioned while being used at the same
time as a framework for fashion scintillations. The convention is unquestioned
that an elaborate evening gown must be worn by a lady at a formal evening
affair; this convention carries with it the continuous permission to exercise a
variety of fashion choices. The convention obtains among men of wearing woolen
suits, but this non-competitive convention bears on its surface among many men,
especially young men, a flashy display of fashion changes. Convention may thus
be likened to Atlas carrying the world of fashion upon his shoulders.

STRUCTURAL NATURE OF CONVENTIONS

Convention deals primarily with social structures rather than with
social functioning. Convention is represented chiefly by forms. The
eating of three meals a day by Americans, carrying food to the mouth with a
fork, serving coffee at an evening dinner party, and so on, all deal with the
forms of securing nourishment, not with nourishment itself. A formal reception
affords opportunities for strangers to be introduced to each other and to
express a few words of greeting, to act as though they were old-time friends,
bowing graciously to each other, but not to develop very much real and abiding
friendship. Almost a negligible percentage of the persons one is introduced to
at a formal reception thereby become permanent friends. It is the form rather
than the throbbing content of

(
179) friendship which is present. In the same way the making of formal calls
and the leaving of calling cards are of the form rather than the essence of
friendship.

Manners are elaborate conventional forms relating to nearly all the social
relationships of cultured persons. They are intended to smooth off the rough
edges of social contacts. They prevent individuality from hindering the
functioning of sociality. Manners are methods of social approach, implying-
incipient good will.

When carried to an extreme, manners are deceptive. Politeness is an
illustration of manners that easily become lying. In order not to offend the
feelings and the friendship of another person one may tell him how fine he looks
in a new unbecoming hat; or how well he looks, when he is ill; or how splendid a
speech he made when he blundered.

Even in the ordinary exercise of manners, the form often belies the spirit.
Two track contestants who at heart hate each other, shake hands before the
race—in the presence of the spectators. Business forms sanction addressing a
strange woman as "My dear Madam."

As society grows older it gives more heed to manners and to the forms of
social interaction. The pioneer is too busy mastering the wilderness and making
adjustments mental and social to give time to the formal sides of social life,
and hence is brusque or even rude. His pioneer life affords him few social
contacts, and the "rough edges" of his conduct disturb no one, for there is
plenty of elbow room. But when pioneering ends and a people depend on nature
less and on one another more, they turn their attention to social forms as well
as contents and develop manners even to the point of obsequiousness. Especially
is this true where autocracy rather than democracy prevails.

ORIGINS OF CONVENTIONS

Convention is based on past real or alleged utility. What is now a
convention is often merely a shell of a former useful activity. The dress suit
coat was once a long, square-cornered coat, but the corners were troublesome in
horse-back riding and so two buttons were put on the back of the coat and the
corners were buttoned upon them. Later, square corners were cut out of the front
of the coat, leaving the two buttons on the back, where they have remained
useless. The square corners that were cut from the front facilitated horseback
riding; they are still cut out although new means of traveling have superseded
horseback riding. The square notches in the collar of a man's coat once served a
useful

(
180) purpose ; when overcoats were not worn and when the collar of the
regular coat was turned up, the notched out corners made a place for the chin of
the wearer. The collars of ordinary coats are no longer turned up, but the
notches are still cut out of them.

The French heel once served a useful purpose. It was first worn by Louis XIV
who because of his short stature had several "lifts" added to the heels of his
shoes. The French heel is no longer worn by short men, nor exclusively by short
women, but by women generally, not to increase height, but to be conventional in
defiance of all the demands to the contrary of personal hygiene and comfort in
walking. In the same way the unserviceable hoods on academic gowns are still
maintained ; they originated in a definite utility to the monks who wore them
several centuries ago.

Superstitions persist in a conventional way, without merit ; but once they
were instruments of worth. The superstition of "knocking on wood" which appears
silly today represented at one time a genuine religious spirit of supplication
and consisted in prayerfully touching the wooden cross.

Every religious dogma likewise once represented an advanced idea or belief,
but it became rooted in religious custom and may remain today as a convention,
although several centuries behind modern scientific knowledge. Economic
laissez-faire doctrines once served to stimulate the masses who were being
released under a rising tide of democracy, but now they are tolerated
conventionally, while governmental control increases apace.

The belief in luck was valid in primitive days when the unknown impinged on
every hand, when the simpler phenomena of nature were not understood, when
locomotion was slow and communication was limited to the voice. Under such
conditions the belief in luck often gave the needed amount of initiative and of
persistence to insure success. This belief still maintains itself, but only as
convention except in the field of gambling,[4]
where it acts as an all-powerful lure in causing people to risk their money for
improbable returns. What is rational in one age is apt to persist until it no
longer meets human needs, and thus becomes metamorphosed into convention.

Convention has been largely created by the hereditary leisure classes.[5]
Not being forced to earn a living or to work strenuously, they often give their
attention to the fringes and the forms of life, magnifying and exaggerating
them. Since "society affairs" fill their lives, much attention is

(
181) given to the forms of being introduced, of greeting, of all the phases
of politeness ; "manners" rule relentlessly.

For the average person the origin of convention is found in an unthinking
acceptance or doing of prevailing ideas or activities. We lazily drift "into an
acceptance of prevailing conditions and attitudes as they are found in our
immediate place and time, as when we drift into our political and religious
life." [6]

Many conventions are specific developments of general conventions or of a
conventional atmosphere, partly caused by and partly the cause of a prevailing
opinion. For example, "the polite thing in Belgium and France is always to
address a young woman of marriageable age as `Madame,' instead of `Miss' as with
us."[7]

The hereditary leisure groups use convention imitation to foster undemocratic
teachings.[8]
This point found expression
in the false social dogma which is spread by the "upper" classes that "manual
labor is degrading." In a commercial age it is easy for the false belief of a
business class that "pecuniary success is the only success," to permeate even
the education of the young in the home and school.

Autocracy readily employs itself in getting undemocratic ideas inculcated
into the lower class customs. By every conceivable type of direct and indirect
suggestion false conceptions are taught in order that these deceivers may assume
an air of superiority. Factory girls let it be known—often by a glance of the
eye—that servant girls will not be admitted to their parties. In South America
guests in hotels or at clubs get themselves respected by encouraging the
doctrine "of being waited on."[9]
Hence
self-serve cafeterias are always scorned by autocratic individuals. This
practice becomes ridiculous in the story of the French king who allowed himself
to be fatally over-heated because there was no servant present at the moment to
move his seat away from the hearth-fire.

Education is easily duped by blind guides with conventionalized anti-social
ideas. American Rhodes scholars when in England have been "looked at askance for
doing for themselves things which the British student has done for him by his
`scout'."[10]
The members of American
University rowing crews have been "protested" in England because they

(
182) were not "gentlemen," as proved by the fact that they were working
their way through college.[11]

Clericalism promotes countless conventions as a means of maintaining itself
in power, for example, the holier than thou demeanor, the vestments, the
emphasis on creeds. Militarism likewise flaunts conventions, as illustrated in
the haughty manners of many officers, the meticulous attention to saluting, and
the fine distinctions made in obeying orders. Imperialism holds tenaciously to
"rights."

IMPERIOUSNESS OF CONVENTIONS

Convention rules imperiously. It brooks no question; if challenged it
cries "heretic," "traitor," "anarchist," "bolshevist." Dreading criticism, it
hides in the semi-darkness of awe, fear, and respect of its devotee. Its
meanings are drilled into child nature by repetition and ritual. The uncritical
years and the lack of judgment of childhood lead to its easy acceptance. The
"sacred memories" of childhood combine to enforce its dominion over maturity. It
can be removed from its throne only through exercise of the highest degree of
personal self control and rational insight.

Convention's imperiousness increases with the age of a society. A new
civilization is too fluid to have developed the formal phases of associative
life. The pioneer is forced by circumstances to rely on himself too much to be
considerate of social forms. But as a civilization matures, the reactions of
individuals crystallize into standard types of behavior, and when it passes
maturity and its life energies slow up, its structural side turns to bone, which
the enterprising individual may peck at but cannot dent.

With the rise of convention imperiousness, the forms of life control the
content, and often assume in self protection a deceptive coloring. A bluff and
bluster may deceive a few, but ultimately the shrivelled heart, the decayed
core, is disclosed, and the societary ramshackle falls. The Czar and his
followers killed those who opposed them, until the exigencies of war required
that these "enemy" subjects be consigned to fight in the Czarist armies, but the
demands of urgent war situations finally revealed the thinness of the shell by
which the imperial party had domineered over a nation. A few quick revolutionary
strokes were made, and the shell collapsed without giving evidence of even a
tremor, so weak had it become.

(183)

Convention imitation arbitrarily limits competition between classes.
Not only is convention imitation universal and non-competitive on a given social
level, but it prevents one level from imitating another. Caste forbids one
social status from imitating the one above it. "In Japan the code of the
jinrikisha men forbids one runner to pass by another going in the same
direction."[12]
The private may not wear
the uniform of the officer, and the layman may not don the robes of the clergy.
It is partly for reasons like this that conventions remain uniform. The urge or
competition making necessary any modification has been crushed out.

TRANSFORMATIONS IN CONVENTIONS

Convention often undergoes a transformation in meaning. After losing
its original content, it cleverly lives on by bodying forth new meanings.
Hallowe'en, once an expression of the belief in the return of departed spirits,
now serves as an occasion of festivities ranging from ordinary social
"parties" to rowdy expeditions by obstreperous youth. Thanksgiving Day with its
family altar and church gatherings of thankfulness to Almighty God now is looked
forward to by many as an occasion for overeating or for witnessing a football
contest.

Convention survives by becoming recognized as symbolic. The Apostles'
Creed is repeated by many thousands who no longer believe it in all particulars,
but justify their hypocrisy on the ground that it is' the general spirit of the
Creed to which they subscribe rather than the particular statements in it.
Rituals are accepted as symbolic, but not always in their particular
professions. The House of Lords is endured not for its present worth but as
representative of past national glory. The antiquated ideas of some aged people
are not challenged because of respect for hallowed fatherhood and motherhood.
The King James version of the Bible with its sometimes figurative rather than
accurate translations is maintained out of courtesy to the "King's English."
Although expressive of a crude social order the classics of the Romans, Greeks,
and Hebrews are still read widely ; for the sake of the best a large amount of
dross is conventionally carried along. A university was once located at an ox
ford, and another at Cam's Bridge; each of these plebeian terms has become
conventionalized and immortalized in the names of England's two great
institutions of higher learning.

(
184)

PRINCIPLES

1. The non-competitive uniformities of behavior relating to the formal or
structural phases of life are conventional.

2. Convention is an imitation of past forms that are usually inculcated in
the early uncritical years of life.

3. Convention is the structural phase of the activities and beliefs of which
custom is the content or functional element; it may become entirely separated
from custom, the latter having shrivelled away.

4. When the content of a past alleged or real utility disappears the form may
persist as a convention.

5. A main section of the field of convention is represented by manners and
the forms of "polite society."

6. Convention has often been created by the hereditary leisure classes, who
unduly magnify formalities.

7. Convention rules imperiously, and increasingly so, as the age of a group
advances.

8. Convention may survive by adopting new meanings or by becoming symbolic.

REVIEW QUESTIONS

1. Explain the relation of convention to custom.

2. How are convention and fashion related?

3. Why is the display of good manners conventional among the leisure classes?

4. What survivals, no longer useful, are there in the quaintly cut dress suit
coat?

5. What is the origin of most conventions?

6. Why does convention rule imperiously?

7. Explain the relation of convention to social competition.

8. How do conventions sometimes change their meanings?

9. Illustrate : convention is symbolic.

PROBLEMS

1. Name three leading conventions that you have followed today.

2. Why does a Christian take off his hat in church and a Mohammedan his
shoes?

(
185)

3. Explain : Manners become worse as one travels from East to West they are
best in Asia, fairly good in Europe, poor in America.

4. Why has the dress suit for men remained more or less the same the world
over?

5. Why may a man wear the same dress suit for years, whereas a woman must
have a new dress for almost every formal occasion?

6. In what utility did the hood on the academic gown originate?

7. Explain : "Such generally admired beauties of person or costume as the
bandaged foot, the high heel, the wasp waist, the full skirt, and the long train
are such as incapacitate from all useful work."

8. Illustrate: "Almost everywhere propriety and conventionality press more
mercilessly on woman than on man, thereby lessening her range of choice and
dwarfing her will."

9. Is our food a matter of personal choice or of convention?

10. Does one's manner of living, or manner of work change the more rapidly,
and why?

Notes

One of the best discussions of the relationship between custom and
convention is given by E. A. Ross, in his Social Psychology (Macmillan,
1938), Ch. XII. Also see R. H. Gault, Social Psychology (Holt, 1923), Ch.
VIII.

The distinction that convention is an unthought feeling of acceptance,
approval or disapproval of a point of view or form of behavior or station in
life, while a custom is an overt method, form or habit of behavior which gives
outward expression to the feeling of approval or disapproval (Gault, Social
Psychology, 179) seems questionable.

The original published version of this document is in the public domain. The
Mead Project exercises no copyrights over the original text.

This page and related Mead Project pages constitute the personal web-site
of Dr. Lloyd Gordon Ward (retired), who is responsible for its content.
Although the Mead Project continues to be presented through the
generosity of Brock University, the contents of this page do not reflect
the opinion of Brock University. Brock University is not responsible for
its content.

Fair Use Statement:

Scholars are permitted to reproduce this material for personal use.
Instructors are permitted to reproduce this material for educational use by
their students.

Otherwise, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, for the purpose of profit or personal benefit, without written permission from the Mead Project. Permission is granted for inclusion of the electronic text of these pages, and their related images in any index that provides free access to its listed documents.